ABSTRACT
We might know the difference between impairment, no impairment and substantial impairment when we see it, but it’s had to describe. The elusiveness and opaqueness of legal decision making described in chapter 3 comes from two inherent limitations. One is that access is seen as a condition deriving from property, not from space. The second, which may be innately related, is that partitions of space of are not measurable using words and sentences. Reason and rationality are desiderata in legal thought and represented in legal testimony and transcripts through sentence-like statements, but sentence-like statements do not adequately represent spatial-visual reality. Frank (1948, 930) quotes Langer to make the point that aspects of legal discourse are a limited representation of reality.
